Skip to Content
Register · Login
About Theme

A Letterboxing Community

Atlas Quest
Search Edit Search

Read Thread: Restrictions for Box Types

Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Oct 31, 2008 6:32am
Thread (disabled) Board
A while back, I was making a virtual and I wanted it to be that only the people who had more than 500 virtual finds could solve it. I went into the box restrictions page and being the first time I had even tried to set restrictions, I just figured F meant virtual finds in this case and P meant virtual plants... well, that wasn't so. They were just for Plants and Finds of traditional boxes. Because I had very little plants, I couldn't even view my own clue to the box. I changed the restrictions so there were none after that.

So, why can't we have restrictions for the box type we're making if it's non-traditional. We could keep the traditional restrictions on the pages, but could we add to them. I mean, for example:

Could we set restricitions on a new LTC that would only be available to people who have 100 finds or more? How about LTC plants to go along with that?

Just a suggestion for the suggestion box. Hope it didn't take too long to read =)

~BOB~
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304539 by Bobguyman
Oct 31, 2008 8:02am
Thread (disabled) Board
Just a thought here. I am neither for or against virtuals because I don't do them, but....

I believe the original intent of the restrictions was meant to protect real boxes from being handled improperly by people with little or no experience in letterboxing (ok I'll say it...newbies). I don't think it was designed to be exclusionary in nature. Now it seems like you want to use it just for that, adding a new reason to the mix.

I think we need to be careful on this kind of stuff because it may be a step in the wrong direction and the next step might have a more meaningful impact.

Larry
Disclaimer: Just my two cents!
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304539 by Bobguyman
Oct 31, 2008 10:57am
Thread (disabled) Board
So, why can't we have restrictions for the box type we're making if it's non-traditional.

The main reason is a technical one--AQ doesn't keep a running count of how many non-traditional boxes you've found. The counts you see on your profile, for instance, are counted when you actually view your profile. That's file as far as profiles go--it's not a page that gets used too terribly often. But if AQ had to count virtuals, hitchhikers, postals, and so forth every time a clue was viewed, or the box details page was viewed, a search was made--for every single person on Atlas Quest--it could slow things down considerably.

So I use the traditional counts instead since there's always a running count for those. There's no reason I can't start keeping a running count for other types of boxes, but it hasn't been a big priority for me either. *shrug*

-- Ryan
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304670 by Green Tortuga
Oct 31, 2008 11:32am
Thread (disabled) Board
--AQ doesn't keep a running count of how many non-traditional boxes you've found.

Y'know, one could make a case for an entirely separate web site for these non-traditional letterboxes. In fact, one could make a case for calling them something other than letterboxes.
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304683 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 11:45am
Thread (disabled) Board
Y'know, one could make a case for an entirely separate web site for these non-traditional letterboxes. In fact, one could make a case for calling them something other than letterboxes.

That's how waymarking.com got started -- gc.com no longer wanted virtual and locationless caches on the main list. But if GT put virtuals on their own site wouldn't it cost him extra to run 2 separate sites?
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304683 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 12:56pm
Thread (disabled) Board
Y'know, one could make a case for an entirely separate web site for these non-traditional letterboxes.

Most definitely. =) And anyone who did could even add a heck of a lot more support for those types than I've done here. But it would probably annoy people who used them to have to go to multiple websites to take care of all their business.

In fact, one could make a case for calling them something other than letterboxes.

They aren't "real" letterboxes by any stretch of the imagination (I think you'd be hard pressed to find someone who does believe that), but calling them "letterboxes" is more because nobody has thought of a better word to use. *shrug* When I was updating the site removing references to "virtual letterboxes" and "postal letterboxes" to call them "postals" and "virtuals" instead, I still needed a catch-all term I could use to refer to all "objects." Like the "Letterboxes" menubar option--what should that be called if not "letterboxes"?

Letterbox may not be an entirely accurate term for them, but nobody has ever suggested a better one. *shrug*

-- Ryan
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304750 by Green Tortuga
Oct 31, 2008 3:41pm
Thread (disabled) Board
But it would probably annoy people who used them to have to go to multiple websites to take care of all their business.

The separate sites could be highly interconnected -- at least at first. For example, the existing menu listings that take you to the various non-traditional pages could still -- but it'd be a link to a different site rather than just to a different page on the same site.

GT: if someone were to step forward to run such a site, would you help them get started? Perhaps even allowing them to use a copy of the AQ site to begin with, just the name changed?

calling them "letterboxes" is more because nobody has thought of a better word to use. *shrug*

Well, there it is, folks. Anyone have suggestions for better names?

BTW, I *think* there may be existing sites that involve "trading cards" made with rubber stamps or other handmade printing schemes, completely unrelated to letterboxing. Perhaps someone knows more?
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304843 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 3:43pm
Thread (disabled) Board
MY question is WHY are you so interested in getting rid of US???

Goofy girl
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304843 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 3:51pm
Thread (disabled) Board
For example, the existing menu listings that take you to the various non-traditional pages could still -- but it'd be a link to a different site rather than just to a different page on the same site.

That doesn't really matter--once they're on the other site, they'd have to log in all over again because cookies on one domain aren't good on another one. It would be a major inconvenience for people who'd be pushed to the site.

I'd just as soon prefer trying to hide the elements that people aren't interested in than kicking those elements out into completely separate websites. The best of both worlds. =)

-- Ryan
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304848 by Green Tortuga
Oct 31, 2008 4:29pm
Thread (disabled) Board
once they're on the other site, they'd have to log in all over again because cookies on one domain aren't good on another one. It would be a major inconvenience for people who'd be pushed to the site.

Aaaaargh! When you're on geocaching.com and click on the link to enter the geocaching forums, you apparently go to a different site -- but are automagically logged into the forums site. How does that work?

Either way, logging onto a separate site certainly wouldn't seem to be a "major inconvenience" to me since once you've been there once and have the cookies in place, you get logged on automagically anyway.
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304844 by Goofy girl
Oct 31, 2008 4:31pm
Thread (disabled) Board
MY question is WHY are you so interested in getting rid of US???

Gee, I wasn't trying to seem unsocial. I was merely suggesting that a separate web site might serve your needs better.
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304862 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 4:34pm
Thread (disabled) Board
Okay I was just wondering why it was so important to move us...That's all.

Thanks for replying.

GG
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304862 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 6:09pm
Thread (disabled) Board
MY question is WHY are you so interested in getting rid of US???

I think the issue is more what they are called rather than where they are logged in. Calling them letterboxes runs the risk of "letterboxing" devolving into mere stamp collecting with occassional stamps being hidden in tupperwares out in the woods. I think virtuals and postals should just be called stamps, as in Virtual stamps or Postal Stamp Ring...
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304893 by Trailhead Tessie
Oct 31, 2008 6:20pm
Thread (disabled) Board
well that's not how it sounded when we were being shuffled somewhere else, and I could care less what they are called and don't understand why it's such a BIG deal.

Oh well that's just how I feel. Fine put us somewhere else so you can complain about us just like geocaching.

I'm sorry if it appears I am taking this to heart and shouldn't be.

GG
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304896 by Goofy girl
Oct 31, 2008 7:54pm
Thread (disabled) Board
Fine put us somewhere else so you can complain about us just like geocaching

That's weird - I never said anything about 'putting you somewhere else', nor did I 'complain about you', and where did 'just like geocaching' come from???? -- I also geocache.

If someone wanted to call logbook-making "letterboxing" you could agree that the name would not be appropriate. That does not carry any judgement about making logbooks, just that it is not the same as letterboxing (though related) and should therefore be called something else. Just because letterboxes have logbooks, some of which are very beautiful and involve much time and talent, doesn't mean that trading logbooks through the mail constitutes finding a letterbox. Ditto with postals stamps and virtuals stamps. Even personal travelers. They are not letterboxes, they are stamps, which doesn't imply that there is anything wrong with them, just that they are not letterboxes.
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304912 by Trailhead Tessie
Oct 31, 2008 8:01pm
Thread (disabled) Board
Don't worry about it I'm not going to. I am just upset someone wants to move everything that is not a traditional box somewhere else. What happens will happen no matter what I think or say so I am not going to worry about it.

GG
*one who never should have said anything to begin with* so just ignore me*
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304860 by Kirbert
Oct 31, 2008 8:15pm
Thread (disabled) Board
When you're on geocaching.com and click on the link to enter the geocaching forums, you apparently go to a different site -- but are automagically logged into the forums site. How does that work?

Beats the heck out of me. =) I know Microsoft had a "passport" system that supposedly allowed you to log into multiple websites with the same username and password. I don't know exactly how that works, but I assume that once you're logged in, the other website redirects you back to the original site with extra data in the URL (or as a POST) so that site has enough information to "automagically" log you in.

But frankly, it just seems like more work than it's worth. It's a lot easier to maintain one website that can do everything than lots of websites that do the same thing, and less efficient overall to boot.

-- Ryan
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304912 by Trailhead Tessie
Nov 1, 2008 6:35am
Thread (disabled) Board
I create and solve virtuals. I agree with TT about the verbiage. And I understand GG's anxiety about the talk of moving non-traditionals to another site. In my opinion it's never really worked well when virtuals were removed from geocaching and called waymarks - (and that's speaking from experience because I waymark too). Glad to see that Ryan has no intentions on moving out the non-traditionals. It may be too late to change the titles of what we now call the NTs.
Re: Restrictions for Box Types
Board: Suggestion Box
Reply to: #304860 by Kirbert
Nov 1, 2008 9:10am
Thread (disabled) Board
When you're on geocaching.com and click on the link to enter the geocaching forums, you apparently go to a different site -- but are automagically logged into the forums site. How does that work?

The first time you went to the forums you entered your id and password and it saved a cookie in your browser.

dave